Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia I-MA II-SEMESTER CONTEMPERORARY LITERARY THEORY (18KP2E06) UNIT-I STRUCTURALISM, POST- STRUCTURALISM, DECONSTRUCTION 1. Ferdinand de Saussure - the object of study 2. Roman Jakobson - linguistics and poetics 3. Derrida - differance STRUCTURALISM: A movement of thought in the humanities, widespread in anthropology, linguistics, and literary theory, and influential in the 1950s and ’60s. Based primarily on the linguistic theories of Ferdinand de Saussure, structuralism considered language as a system of signs and signification, the elements of which are understandable only in relation to each other and to the system. In literary theory, structuralism challenged the belief that a work of literature reflected a given reality; instead, a text was constituted of linguistic conventions and situated among other texts. Structuralist critics analyzed material by examining underlying structures, such as characterization or plot, and attempted to show how these patterns were universal and could thus be used to develop general conclusions about both individual works and the systems from which they emerged. The anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss was an important champion of structuralism, as was Roman Jakobsen. Northrop Frye’s attempts to categorize Western literature by archetype had some basis in structuralist thought. Structuralism regarded language as a closed, stable system, and by the late 1960s it had given way to post-structuralism. POST- STRUCTURALISM: Post-structuralism is a late-twentieth-century development in philosophy and literary theory, particularly associated with the work of Jacques Derrida and his followers. It originated as a reaction against structuralism, which first emerged in Ferdinand de Saussure’s work on linguistics. By the 1950s structuralism had been adapted in anthropology (Lévi-Strauss), psychoanalysis ( Lacan) and literary theory (Barthes), and there were hopes that it could provide the framework for rigorous accounts in all areas of the human sciences. Although structuralism was never formulated as a philosophical theory in its own right, its implicit theoretical basis was a kind of Cartesianism, but without the emphasis on subjectivity. It aimed, like Descartes, at a logically rigorous system of knowledge based on sharp explicit definitions of fundamental concepts. The difference was that, for structuralism, the system itself was absolute, with no grounding in subjectivity. Post-structuralist critiques of structuralism typically challenge the assumption that systems are self-sufficient structures and question the possibility of the precise definitions on which systems of knowledge must be based.
CONTEMPERORARY LITERARY THEORY (18KP2E06)
Mar 10, 2023
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
I-MA
II-SEMESTER
1. Ferdinand de Saussure - the object of study
2. Roman Jakobson - linguistics and poetics
3. Derrida - differance
A movement of thought in the humanities, widespread in anthropology, linguistics, and
literary theory, and influential in the 1950s and ’60s. Based primarily on the linguistic theories of
Ferdinand de Saussure, structuralism considered language as a system of signs and signification,
the elements of which are understandable only in relation to each other and to the system. In
literary theory, structuralism challenged the belief that a work of literature reflected a given
reality; instead, a text was constituted of linguistic conventions and situated among other texts.
Structuralist critics analyzed material by examining underlying structures, such as
characterization or plot, and attempted to show how these patterns were universal and could thus
be used to develop general conclusions about both individual works and the systems from which
they emerged. The anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss was an important champion of
structuralism, as was Roman Jakobsen. Northrop Frye’s attempts to categorize Western literature
by archetype had some basis in structuralist thought. Structuralism regarded language as a
closed, stable system, and by the late 1960s it had given way to post-structuralism.
POST- STRUCTURALISM:
Post-structuralism is a late-twentieth-century development in philosophy and literary
theory, particularly associated with the work of Jacques Derrida and his followers. It originated
as a reaction against structuralism, which first emerged in Ferdinand de Saussure’s work on
linguistics. By the 1950s structuralism had been adapted in anthropology (Lévi-Strauss),
psychoanalysis ( Lacan) and literary theory (Barthes), and there were hopes that it could provide
the framework for rigorous accounts in all areas of the human sciences.
Although structuralism was never formulated as a philosophical theory in its own right, its
implicit theoretical basis was a kind of Cartesianism, but without the emphasis on subjectivity. It
aimed, like Descartes, at a logically rigorous system of knowledge based on sharp explicit
definitions of fundamental concepts. The difference was that, for structuralism, the system itself
was absolute, with no grounding in subjectivity. Post-structuralist critiques of structuralism
typically challenge the assumption that systems are self-sufficient structures and question the
possibility of the precise definitions on which systems of knowledge must be based.
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
Derrida carries out his critique of structuralist systems by the technique of deconstruction. This is
the process of showing, through close textual and conceptual analysis, how definitions of
fundamental concepts (for example, presence versus absence, true versus false) are undermined
by the very effort to formulate and employ them. Derrida’s approach has particularly influenced
literary theory and criticism in the USA. In addition, Richard Rorty, developing themes from
pragmatism and recent analytic philosophy, has put forward a distinctively American version of
post-structuralism.
DECONSTRUCTION:
Deconstruction, form of philosophical and literary analysis, derived mainly from work
begun in the 1960s by the French philosopher Jacques Derrida, that questions the
fundamental conceptual distinctions, or “oppositions,” in Western philosophy through a close
examination of the language and logic of philosophical and literary texts. In the 1970s the term
was applied to work by Derrida, Paul de Man, J. Hillis Miller, and Barbara Johnson, among other
scholars. In the 1980s it designated more loosely a range of radical theoretical enterprises
in diverse areas of the humanities and social sciences, including—in addition to philosophy and
literature—law, psychoanalysis, architecture, anthropology, theology, feminism, gay and lesbian
studies, political theory, historiography, and film theory. In polemical discussions
about intellectual trends of the late 20th-century, deconstruction was sometimes used
pejoratively to suggest nihilism and frivolous skepticism. In popular usage the term has come to
mean a critical dismantling of tradition and traditional modes of thought.
FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE - THE OBJECT OF STUDY
SUMMARY
Saussure is known as the father of modern linguistics. He is a structuralist . He gave the
theory of signs. Through his work he tries to search for the underline scientific objective and
structure of phenomenon.
In order to understand his work the topic can be divided into the following categories.
1. Langage, Langue, and Parole
2. Saussure’s Idea of Signifier and Signified
3. Features of the Language
According to Saussure Langage is the system of all the languages that exist in the
world. It includes languages like English Hindi Urdu French German Russian etc.
Langue, on the other hand, refers to a particular language that is spoken in a
particular region by a particular group of people. A particular langue has its own
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
signs, diction, and rules. E.g. Hindi is a langue that is spoken specifically by the
people belonging to India.
Parole refers to the specific way of speaking by an individual i.e. an individual can
use langue in his own way to express his ideas.
Saussure tries to explain the concept of Langue and Parole by taking the example of chess. The
rules of chess can be considered as Langue and their use by a particular player will be Parole.
Saussure held that language has a diachronic and synchronic system. The diachronic system
happens over a period of time while the synchronic system happens at a point of time. Every
utterance happens at a point of time. This utterance or speaking consists of three parts-sound
waves (physical), hearing (physiological) and concepts (psychological). The words can be
understood because of the psychological part. Our mind has such a system of sound that
corresponds system of ideas. The diachronic system is proof that a particular language has a
life. It changes in accordance with the needs and with the time.
SAUSSURE’S IDEA OF SIGNIFIER AND SIGNIFIED:
The language is the system of signs. It has two components- the signifier and signified.
The signifier refers to the specific sound pattern of a specific langue that point
towards the image of a particular object in our mind. E.g. Sea, Tree, Notebook,
etc.
On the other hand, the signified refers to the acoustic image of the specific
object which a specific word or signified points to. E.g. the sea or tree that exists.
Both the signifier and signified collectively make up a sign. This sign refers to the object
of which the image is formed in the mind. Thus the language is a system of signs.
According to Saussure, there is no fundamental relationship between the signifier and
signified as it was believed before him. He believed that the relationship between the signifier
and signified is arbitrary but conventional and thus cannot be used willingly. The system of
signs works on the basis of the difference between the objects.
E.g. The sea differs from the tree because the sea is in liquid form, large, blue and has no
shape etc while on the other hand tree is solid, green, has branches and standing etc.
The moment there is a sound pattern, it signifies something which says that there is a
direct correspondence between a signifier and signified.
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
Features of the Language
1. Language is a structured system.
2. It is a well-defined entity.
3. It is a part of social institutions and such should be studied in an in-depth approach.
4. It is homogeneous in nature.
5. It can be studied independently.
6. The linguistic structure of a language system is not less real than a speech.
7. Language is a structured system is a self-contained whole.
8. Language is an instrument of cognizance. It is used to make sense of objects by name.
ANALYSIS OF FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE - THE OBJECT OF STUDY
In his essay “The Object of Study”, Ferdinand de Saussure studies linguistics in terms of
the psychological, biological, and social aspects it entails.Saussure’s short essay on linguistics
examines the way in which language structured, used, and exchanged in society. The essay is
assembled in three parts: defining language, linguistic structure, and semiology. Unlike the
previous essays read by Iser, Fish, and Schweickart, this essay doesn’t incorporate readers or
writers, it examines words and the exchange of words. Repeatedly, Saussure uses the words
“society” or “social” when describing languages use. Likewise, he incorporates psychological
references to Paul Broca to explain the “faculty of speech” and describes biological importance
through showing the auditory connections to speech. His essay expands on the idea of linguistics
through acknowledging the importance of written words, signs, and verbal exchanges.
Society is implemented in Saussure’s essay as an instrument for language which we
found interesting. His first bullet point alludes to this in a sentence, “The faculty of articulating
words is put to use only by means of the linguistic instrument created and provided by society” .
It was once told by a professor that events and experiences mean nothing unless shared with
another, unless it is given perspective. This quote reminds us of that idea. Saussure’s diction
“linguistic instrument” very colorfully suggests that language is the result of force acting upon it.
The additive of society implies a structural aspect is needed for articulating language. Certain
phrases may differ in denotative implications but share the same connotative allocations because
of the meanings given to it by society. For example, musical artist Michael Jackson changed
American vernacular with his record “Bad”; all of a sudden, bad wasn’t associated with some
immoral wrong doing instead it meant good or cool.
Saussure also acknowledges the evolution of language which we found expanded his
argument about society and linguistics. He says, “Language at any given time involves an
established system and an evolution”. Words such as “thee”, “thou”, and “art” quickly come to
mind. While these words can easily be found in texts or films focusing on Romanticism, they are
rarely used in contemporary, everyday language. Language, linguistics, and ways of
communicating evolve with the times and the society which encompasses it.
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
ROMAN JAKOBSON - LINGUISTICS AND POETICS
Roman Jakobson was one of the most powerful minds in the 20th century intellectual
history. As a front line member of the Moscow Linguistic Circle, his contributions to phonology,
grammar and structural linguistics are very well-known and gratefully acknowledged all across
the linguistics world. But he has also made an outstanding contribution to literary analysis i.e.
poetics, by using linguistics as a tool. Using his immense learning, Jakobson very lucidly and
maturely clarifies in his essay “Linguistics and Poetics” that linguistics (a scientific discipline)
and poetics (one of the humanities) are not opposed to each other as commonly believed among
‘bigoted’ linguists and ‘hard core’ literary critics. Rather they complement each other and their
combined application i.e. a work of art enhances its ‘wonder’ and ‘beauty’ and does not destroy
it (as literary critics insist). The essay offers clever and convincing arguments to prove that there
exists an inseparable bond between linguistics and poetics and therefore a linguistic model can
be used for the study of literature
Jakobson begins in “Linguistics and Poetics” by defining the two terms in the title of the
essay. He says that “Poetics” is the study of literature and it explores the qualities that make a
verbal structure (a structure consisting of words) a work of art. On the other hand, “linguistics” is
called the global science of verbal structure i.e. it studies language in all its manifestations. Now
poetic or literary language is obviously one of the many uses of language. So, “the linguist
whose field is any and every kind of language may and must include poetic (literary) language in
his study.” Thus Roman Jacobson’s principal point in the essay is that poetics and linguistics are
both concerned with the verbal messages. Linguistics studies verbal structure and poetics
analyses the elements in these verbal messages that award them the qualities of being the works
of art. Hence there is no opposition between them and their common concern is verbal messages
and their structure. Jakobson goes on to forward many more arguments to prove similarities
between poetics and linguistics.
The first similarity, of course, is that both deal with verbal messages and their structure.
Secondly, both literature and language are part of the theory of signs i.e. semiotics and
semiology.
Thirdly, being, sign-systems, both are concerned with meaning generation.
Fourthly, poetics and linguistics both deal with their data (literature and
language)objectively and in a non judgmental way.
Fifthly, synchronic and diachronic approaches are equally applicable and used in
linguistics and poetics. We study literature through historical development (diachrony)
and also study literary works of a particular time (synchrony). Similarly language is also
studied synchronically (of a particular time) and diachronically (across time, historically).
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
Generally, poetics is considered to be a purposeful, value-based, human discipline while
linguistics is regarded as a mechanical, objective discipline serving no purpose. Jakobsen rejects
this distinction and claims that “all verbal messages, whether poetic or linguistic are purposeful
and goal-oriented.” Thus, according to Jakobson, poetics and linguistics are not separate. Both
are equally needed for a complete understanding of literature.
Asserting that a linguistic model can be used for the study of literature, Jakobson says that
literary texts are linguistic structures. So, when a linguist is studying literary utterances, he is
very much within his field i.e. the study and analysis of the structure of language. According to
Roman Jakobson, every language has a system of codes and sub-codes which perform different
functions. It is very important to understand these functions of language because poetic function
of language is one of them. According to Jakobson, every act of verbal communication (whether
literary or any other) requires the following elements shown in a diagrammatical form by him in
the essay:
Context, Message
Addresser -------------------------------- Receiver
Context, code
That is to say, every verbal act requires an addresser who wants to convey a message this
message. This message is addressed to someone, the receiver. But the message can be
understood when there is a proper context, a proper contact between the speaker and the receiver
and when both follow and understand the same code.
The about six elements, according to Jakobson must be present in each speech-act.
Depending on whether the focus is on the receiver, addresser, context, message, contact or code,
there is a corresponding function which has been shown in the following scheme:
1.EMOTIVE FUNCTION:
A verbal message performs emotive function when it is directed towards or aimed at the
speaker/addresser/sender. It indicates the sender's attitude towards what he is speaking/writing
about. It expresses emotions. All personal writings, autobiographies, interjections belong to this
function of language. Jakobson refers to the audition of an actor who had to convey different
meanings from a message consisting of a limited number of words. First person pronouns are
common when language performs the emotive function in a particular writing. Lamb's essays
and many of Wordsworth’s poems employ the emotive function of language.
2. CONATIVE FUNCTION:
A verbal act which is oriented towards the addressee/listener/receiver is said to perform
the conative function. All imperative sentences, political speeches and odes make use of conative
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
function of language. Second person pronouns frequently occur in this function. Commands and
prayers also employ this function.
3. REFERENTIAL FUNCTION:
This is the most common function of a verbal message because most of the messages are
related to the context. It means that they refer to some objects, ideas, or things. So when context
is the element, the corresponding function of language is referential or denotative.
4. PHATIC FUNCTION:
Some speech acts or messages are phatic. Such messages serve to establish or prolong
contact. Words like ‘well’, ‘bye’, an infant’s sounds to his mother and expressions like Nice
weather for this time of the year!, How do you do?, Hello, is that Mary? belong to the phatic
function of language. It is a very useful social function of language.
5. METALINGUAL FUNCTION:
Some messages are metalingual because they require an orientation to the code itself.
This is true in case of children learning the meanings of words during the process of language
learning. Meaning or message is conveyed when the addresser and the addressee share the same
code. The lack of understanding the code results in expressions like “I did not understand” or
“What do you mean?” Jakobson gives an interesting dialogue to convey the metalingual function
of language.
B-But what is plucked?
A- Plucked means flunked.
A- To be flunked means to fail in an exam.
B- And what is sophomore?
A- A sophomore is a second year student.
In other words, when we use language to talk about language, we are using
metalanguage. Metalanguage is language about language. When we are learning a new language
or a book on grammar are examples of metalingual function of language.
6. POETIC FUNCTION :
A verbal act performs poetic function when it draws the attention of the reader to its own
diction, sound patterns and syntax. The verbal acts which perform poetic function focus on the
aesthetic features of language like metaphor, simile, paradox, irony, assonance, consonance etc.
After listing the six compulsory elements in each utterance namely sender, receiver, context,
message, contact, code and the six corresponding functions of each utterance namely emotive,
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
conative, referential, poetic, phatic and metalingual, Jakobson asserts that all instances of
language fulfill at least one of these six functions. It means that in each speech act, one function
is predominant but others may be a little suppressed. Thus in a poetic utterance, the poetic
function will be predominant but it will be accompanied by other functions at a lower level.
Poetic function does not operate in literature exclusively. It is just predominant over other
functions. Jakobson gives a beautiful example to prove that even ordinary conversation may
contain the poetic function of language. Anyone who says “She sells sea shells at the sea shore”
is making a plain statement in poetic language. Jakobsen refers to a girl who was always heard
saying ‘Horrible Harry’. She never said Dreadful Harry or Frightful Harry. Though horrible,
dreadful, frightful mean the same thing. When asked why she said only horrible, she said,
“Because horrible suits better.” Now she was unconsciously using a literary, poetic device called,
paronomasia, similarly, one would always say Joan & Margery and not Margery & Joan because
the first combination is smoother. Literary theories, too, tend to place an emphasis on one or the
other function of language. Thus the function diagram of language would be redrawn as under:
Marxist (Context-Referential)
Formalistic (Message-Poetic)
Structuralist (Contact-Phatic)
Metalinguist (Code-Metalingual)
To sum up poetics and linguistics need not be hostile to each other. Both are competent to
study literature. But the literary scholar should not believe that he can study literary work
without giving due attention to the medium i.e. language. And no linguist should try to justify the
investigation of literary language without taking guidance from those who devote themselves to
the study of literature. Jakobson comes down heavily on those who oppose combining linguistics
and poetics for literary studies: “A linguist deaf to the poetic function of language and a literary
scholar indifferent to linguistic problems are equally inadequate and lop sided.”
DERRIDA’S - DIFFERANCE
DERRIDA’S CONCEPT OF DIFFERANCE:
A concept introduced by Derrida, differance is a pun on “differance” and “deferment”,
and is that attribute of language, by which meaning is generated because of a word’s difference
from other words in a signifying system, and at the same time, meaning is inevitably and
infinitely deferred or postponed, is constantly under erasure and can be glimpsed only through
“aporias” or deadlocks in understanding.
Differance undermines the unity and coherence of a text when a deconstructive reading is
performed. Consequently, meaning is disseminated across the text and can be found only in
traces, in the unending chain…
II-SEMESTER
1. Ferdinand de Saussure - the object of study
2. Roman Jakobson - linguistics and poetics
3. Derrida - differance
A movement of thought in the humanities, widespread in anthropology, linguistics, and
literary theory, and influential in the 1950s and ’60s. Based primarily on the linguistic theories of
Ferdinand de Saussure, structuralism considered language as a system of signs and signification,
the elements of which are understandable only in relation to each other and to the system. In
literary theory, structuralism challenged the belief that a work of literature reflected a given
reality; instead, a text was constituted of linguistic conventions and situated among other texts.
Structuralist critics analyzed material by examining underlying structures, such as
characterization or plot, and attempted to show how these patterns were universal and could thus
be used to develop general conclusions about both individual works and the systems from which
they emerged. The anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss was an important champion of
structuralism, as was Roman Jakobsen. Northrop Frye’s attempts to categorize Western literature
by archetype had some basis in structuralist thought. Structuralism regarded language as a
closed, stable system, and by the late 1960s it had given way to post-structuralism.
POST- STRUCTURALISM:
Post-structuralism is a late-twentieth-century development in philosophy and literary
theory, particularly associated with the work of Jacques Derrida and his followers. It originated
as a reaction against structuralism, which first emerged in Ferdinand de Saussure’s work on
linguistics. By the 1950s structuralism had been adapted in anthropology (Lévi-Strauss),
psychoanalysis ( Lacan) and literary theory (Barthes), and there were hopes that it could provide
the framework for rigorous accounts in all areas of the human sciences.
Although structuralism was never formulated as a philosophical theory in its own right, its
implicit theoretical basis was a kind of Cartesianism, but without the emphasis on subjectivity. It
aimed, like Descartes, at a logically rigorous system of knowledge based on sharp explicit
definitions of fundamental concepts. The difference was that, for structuralism, the system itself
was absolute, with no grounding in subjectivity. Post-structuralist critiques of structuralism
typically challenge the assumption that systems are self-sufficient structures and question the
possibility of the precise definitions on which systems of knowledge must be based.
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
Derrida carries out his critique of structuralist systems by the technique of deconstruction. This is
the process of showing, through close textual and conceptual analysis, how definitions of
fundamental concepts (for example, presence versus absence, true versus false) are undermined
by the very effort to formulate and employ them. Derrida’s approach has particularly influenced
literary theory and criticism in the USA. In addition, Richard Rorty, developing themes from
pragmatism and recent analytic philosophy, has put forward a distinctively American version of
post-structuralism.
DECONSTRUCTION:
Deconstruction, form of philosophical and literary analysis, derived mainly from work
begun in the 1960s by the French philosopher Jacques Derrida, that questions the
fundamental conceptual distinctions, or “oppositions,” in Western philosophy through a close
examination of the language and logic of philosophical and literary texts. In the 1970s the term
was applied to work by Derrida, Paul de Man, J. Hillis Miller, and Barbara Johnson, among other
scholars. In the 1980s it designated more loosely a range of radical theoretical enterprises
in diverse areas of the humanities and social sciences, including—in addition to philosophy and
literature—law, psychoanalysis, architecture, anthropology, theology, feminism, gay and lesbian
studies, political theory, historiography, and film theory. In polemical discussions
about intellectual trends of the late 20th-century, deconstruction was sometimes used
pejoratively to suggest nihilism and frivolous skepticism. In popular usage the term has come to
mean a critical dismantling of tradition and traditional modes of thought.
FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE - THE OBJECT OF STUDY
SUMMARY
Saussure is known as the father of modern linguistics. He is a structuralist . He gave the
theory of signs. Through his work he tries to search for the underline scientific objective and
structure of phenomenon.
In order to understand his work the topic can be divided into the following categories.
1. Langage, Langue, and Parole
2. Saussure’s Idea of Signifier and Signified
3. Features of the Language
According to Saussure Langage is the system of all the languages that exist in the
world. It includes languages like English Hindi Urdu French German Russian etc.
Langue, on the other hand, refers to a particular language that is spoken in a
particular region by a particular group of people. A particular langue has its own
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
signs, diction, and rules. E.g. Hindi is a langue that is spoken specifically by the
people belonging to India.
Parole refers to the specific way of speaking by an individual i.e. an individual can
use langue in his own way to express his ideas.
Saussure tries to explain the concept of Langue and Parole by taking the example of chess. The
rules of chess can be considered as Langue and their use by a particular player will be Parole.
Saussure held that language has a diachronic and synchronic system. The diachronic system
happens over a period of time while the synchronic system happens at a point of time. Every
utterance happens at a point of time. This utterance or speaking consists of three parts-sound
waves (physical), hearing (physiological) and concepts (psychological). The words can be
understood because of the psychological part. Our mind has such a system of sound that
corresponds system of ideas. The diachronic system is proof that a particular language has a
life. It changes in accordance with the needs and with the time.
SAUSSURE’S IDEA OF SIGNIFIER AND SIGNIFIED:
The language is the system of signs. It has two components- the signifier and signified.
The signifier refers to the specific sound pattern of a specific langue that point
towards the image of a particular object in our mind. E.g. Sea, Tree, Notebook,
etc.
On the other hand, the signified refers to the acoustic image of the specific
object which a specific word or signified points to. E.g. the sea or tree that exists.
Both the signifier and signified collectively make up a sign. This sign refers to the object
of which the image is formed in the mind. Thus the language is a system of signs.
According to Saussure, there is no fundamental relationship between the signifier and
signified as it was believed before him. He believed that the relationship between the signifier
and signified is arbitrary but conventional and thus cannot be used willingly. The system of
signs works on the basis of the difference between the objects.
E.g. The sea differs from the tree because the sea is in liquid form, large, blue and has no
shape etc while on the other hand tree is solid, green, has branches and standing etc.
The moment there is a sound pattern, it signifies something which says that there is a
direct correspondence between a signifier and signified.
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
Features of the Language
1. Language is a structured system.
2. It is a well-defined entity.
3. It is a part of social institutions and such should be studied in an in-depth approach.
4. It is homogeneous in nature.
5. It can be studied independently.
6. The linguistic structure of a language system is not less real than a speech.
7. Language is a structured system is a self-contained whole.
8. Language is an instrument of cognizance. It is used to make sense of objects by name.
ANALYSIS OF FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE - THE OBJECT OF STUDY
In his essay “The Object of Study”, Ferdinand de Saussure studies linguistics in terms of
the psychological, biological, and social aspects it entails.Saussure’s short essay on linguistics
examines the way in which language structured, used, and exchanged in society. The essay is
assembled in three parts: defining language, linguistic structure, and semiology. Unlike the
previous essays read by Iser, Fish, and Schweickart, this essay doesn’t incorporate readers or
writers, it examines words and the exchange of words. Repeatedly, Saussure uses the words
“society” or “social” when describing languages use. Likewise, he incorporates psychological
references to Paul Broca to explain the “faculty of speech” and describes biological importance
through showing the auditory connections to speech. His essay expands on the idea of linguistics
through acknowledging the importance of written words, signs, and verbal exchanges.
Society is implemented in Saussure’s essay as an instrument for language which we
found interesting. His first bullet point alludes to this in a sentence, “The faculty of articulating
words is put to use only by means of the linguistic instrument created and provided by society” .
It was once told by a professor that events and experiences mean nothing unless shared with
another, unless it is given perspective. This quote reminds us of that idea. Saussure’s diction
“linguistic instrument” very colorfully suggests that language is the result of force acting upon it.
The additive of society implies a structural aspect is needed for articulating language. Certain
phrases may differ in denotative implications but share the same connotative allocations because
of the meanings given to it by society. For example, musical artist Michael Jackson changed
American vernacular with his record “Bad”; all of a sudden, bad wasn’t associated with some
immoral wrong doing instead it meant good or cool.
Saussure also acknowledges the evolution of language which we found expanded his
argument about society and linguistics. He says, “Language at any given time involves an
established system and an evolution”. Words such as “thee”, “thou”, and “art” quickly come to
mind. While these words can easily be found in texts or films focusing on Romanticism, they are
rarely used in contemporary, everyday language. Language, linguistics, and ways of
communicating evolve with the times and the society which encompasses it.
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
ROMAN JAKOBSON - LINGUISTICS AND POETICS
Roman Jakobson was one of the most powerful minds in the 20th century intellectual
history. As a front line member of the Moscow Linguistic Circle, his contributions to phonology,
grammar and structural linguistics are very well-known and gratefully acknowledged all across
the linguistics world. But he has also made an outstanding contribution to literary analysis i.e.
poetics, by using linguistics as a tool. Using his immense learning, Jakobson very lucidly and
maturely clarifies in his essay “Linguistics and Poetics” that linguistics (a scientific discipline)
and poetics (one of the humanities) are not opposed to each other as commonly believed among
‘bigoted’ linguists and ‘hard core’ literary critics. Rather they complement each other and their
combined application i.e. a work of art enhances its ‘wonder’ and ‘beauty’ and does not destroy
it (as literary critics insist). The essay offers clever and convincing arguments to prove that there
exists an inseparable bond between linguistics and poetics and therefore a linguistic model can
be used for the study of literature
Jakobson begins in “Linguistics and Poetics” by defining the two terms in the title of the
essay. He says that “Poetics” is the study of literature and it explores the qualities that make a
verbal structure (a structure consisting of words) a work of art. On the other hand, “linguistics” is
called the global science of verbal structure i.e. it studies language in all its manifestations. Now
poetic or literary language is obviously one of the many uses of language. So, “the linguist
whose field is any and every kind of language may and must include poetic (literary) language in
his study.” Thus Roman Jacobson’s principal point in the essay is that poetics and linguistics are
both concerned with the verbal messages. Linguistics studies verbal structure and poetics
analyses the elements in these verbal messages that award them the qualities of being the works
of art. Hence there is no opposition between them and their common concern is verbal messages
and their structure. Jakobson goes on to forward many more arguments to prove similarities
between poetics and linguistics.
The first similarity, of course, is that both deal with verbal messages and their structure.
Secondly, both literature and language are part of the theory of signs i.e. semiotics and
semiology.
Thirdly, being, sign-systems, both are concerned with meaning generation.
Fourthly, poetics and linguistics both deal with their data (literature and
language)objectively and in a non judgmental way.
Fifthly, synchronic and diachronic approaches are equally applicable and used in
linguistics and poetics. We study literature through historical development (diachrony)
and also study literary works of a particular time (synchrony). Similarly language is also
studied synchronically (of a particular time) and diachronically (across time, historically).
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
Generally, poetics is considered to be a purposeful, value-based, human discipline while
linguistics is regarded as a mechanical, objective discipline serving no purpose. Jakobsen rejects
this distinction and claims that “all verbal messages, whether poetic or linguistic are purposeful
and goal-oriented.” Thus, according to Jakobson, poetics and linguistics are not separate. Both
are equally needed for a complete understanding of literature.
Asserting that a linguistic model can be used for the study of literature, Jakobson says that
literary texts are linguistic structures. So, when a linguist is studying literary utterances, he is
very much within his field i.e. the study and analysis of the structure of language. According to
Roman Jakobson, every language has a system of codes and sub-codes which perform different
functions. It is very important to understand these functions of language because poetic function
of language is one of them. According to Jakobson, every act of verbal communication (whether
literary or any other) requires the following elements shown in a diagrammatical form by him in
the essay:
Context, Message
Addresser -------------------------------- Receiver
Context, code
That is to say, every verbal act requires an addresser who wants to convey a message this
message. This message is addressed to someone, the receiver. But the message can be
understood when there is a proper context, a proper contact between the speaker and the receiver
and when both follow and understand the same code.
The about six elements, according to Jakobson must be present in each speech-act.
Depending on whether the focus is on the receiver, addresser, context, message, contact or code,
there is a corresponding function which has been shown in the following scheme:
1.EMOTIVE FUNCTION:
A verbal message performs emotive function when it is directed towards or aimed at the
speaker/addresser/sender. It indicates the sender's attitude towards what he is speaking/writing
about. It expresses emotions. All personal writings, autobiographies, interjections belong to this
function of language. Jakobson refers to the audition of an actor who had to convey different
meanings from a message consisting of a limited number of words. First person pronouns are
common when language performs the emotive function in a particular writing. Lamb's essays
and many of Wordsworth’s poems employ the emotive function of language.
2. CONATIVE FUNCTION:
A verbal act which is oriented towards the addressee/listener/receiver is said to perform
the conative function. All imperative sentences, political speeches and odes make use of conative
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
function of language. Second person pronouns frequently occur in this function. Commands and
prayers also employ this function.
3. REFERENTIAL FUNCTION:
This is the most common function of a verbal message because most of the messages are
related to the context. It means that they refer to some objects, ideas, or things. So when context
is the element, the corresponding function of language is referential or denotative.
4. PHATIC FUNCTION:
Some speech acts or messages are phatic. Such messages serve to establish or prolong
contact. Words like ‘well’, ‘bye’, an infant’s sounds to his mother and expressions like Nice
weather for this time of the year!, How do you do?, Hello, is that Mary? belong to the phatic
function of language. It is a very useful social function of language.
5. METALINGUAL FUNCTION:
Some messages are metalingual because they require an orientation to the code itself.
This is true in case of children learning the meanings of words during the process of language
learning. Meaning or message is conveyed when the addresser and the addressee share the same
code. The lack of understanding the code results in expressions like “I did not understand” or
“What do you mean?” Jakobson gives an interesting dialogue to convey the metalingual function
of language.
B-But what is plucked?
A- Plucked means flunked.
A- To be flunked means to fail in an exam.
B- And what is sophomore?
A- A sophomore is a second year student.
In other words, when we use language to talk about language, we are using
metalanguage. Metalanguage is language about language. When we are learning a new language
or a book on grammar are examples of metalingual function of language.
6. POETIC FUNCTION :
A verbal act performs poetic function when it draws the attention of the reader to its own
diction, sound patterns and syntax. The verbal acts which perform poetic function focus on the
aesthetic features of language like metaphor, simile, paradox, irony, assonance, consonance etc.
After listing the six compulsory elements in each utterance namely sender, receiver, context,
message, contact, code and the six corresponding functions of each utterance namely emotive,
Prepared by S.Mercy Lourdes Latitia
conative, referential, poetic, phatic and metalingual, Jakobson asserts that all instances of
language fulfill at least one of these six functions. It means that in each speech act, one function
is predominant but others may be a little suppressed. Thus in a poetic utterance, the poetic
function will be predominant but it will be accompanied by other functions at a lower level.
Poetic function does not operate in literature exclusively. It is just predominant over other
functions. Jakobson gives a beautiful example to prove that even ordinary conversation may
contain the poetic function of language. Anyone who says “She sells sea shells at the sea shore”
is making a plain statement in poetic language. Jakobsen refers to a girl who was always heard
saying ‘Horrible Harry’. She never said Dreadful Harry or Frightful Harry. Though horrible,
dreadful, frightful mean the same thing. When asked why she said only horrible, she said,
“Because horrible suits better.” Now she was unconsciously using a literary, poetic device called,
paronomasia, similarly, one would always say Joan & Margery and not Margery & Joan because
the first combination is smoother. Literary theories, too, tend to place an emphasis on one or the
other function of language. Thus the function diagram of language would be redrawn as under:
Marxist (Context-Referential)
Formalistic (Message-Poetic)
Structuralist (Contact-Phatic)
Metalinguist (Code-Metalingual)
To sum up poetics and linguistics need not be hostile to each other. Both are competent to
study literature. But the literary scholar should not believe that he can study literary work
without giving due attention to the medium i.e. language. And no linguist should try to justify the
investigation of literary language without taking guidance from those who devote themselves to
the study of literature. Jakobson comes down heavily on those who oppose combining linguistics
and poetics for literary studies: “A linguist deaf to the poetic function of language and a literary
scholar indifferent to linguistic problems are equally inadequate and lop sided.”
DERRIDA’S - DIFFERANCE
DERRIDA’S CONCEPT OF DIFFERANCE:
A concept introduced by Derrida, differance is a pun on “differance” and “deferment”,
and is that attribute of language, by which meaning is generated because of a word’s difference
from other words in a signifying system, and at the same time, meaning is inevitably and
infinitely deferred or postponed, is constantly under erasure and can be glimpsed only through
“aporias” or deadlocks in understanding.
Differance undermines the unity and coherence of a text when a deconstructive reading is
performed. Consequently, meaning is disseminated across the text and can be found only in
traces, in the unending chain…
Related Documents
